Beyond Point-and-Shoot Morality: Why Cognitive (Neuro)Science Matters for Ethics
Ethics 124 (4):695-726 (2014)
Abstract
In this article I explain why cognitive science (including some neuroscience) matters for normative ethics. First, I describe the dual-process theory of moral judgment and briefly summarize the evidence supporting it. Next I describe related experimental research examining influences on intuitive moral judgment. I then describe two ways in which research along these lines can have implications for ethics. I argue that a deeper understanding of moral psychology favors certain forms of consequentialism over other classes of normative moral theory. I close with some brief remarks concerning the bright future of ethics as an interdisciplinary enterpriseAuthor's Profile
DOI
10.1086/675875
My notes
Similar books and articles
The Science of Morality and its Normative Implications.Tommaso Bruni, Matteo Mameli & Regina A. Rini - 2013 - Neuroethics 7 (2):159-172.
Reflection and Reasoning in Moral Judgment.Joshua D. Greene - 2012 - Cognitive Science 36 (1):163-177.
A Cognitive–Intuitionist Model of Moral Judgment.Adenekan Dedeke - 2015 - Journal of Business Ethics 126 (3):1-21.
Cognitive Neuroscience and Moral Decision-making: Guide or Set Aside?Derek Leben - 2010 - Neuroethics 4 (2):163-174.
No Need for Alarm: A Critical Analysis of Greene’s Dual-Process Theory of Moral Decision-Making.Robyn Bluhm - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (3):299-316.
Moral Reasoning: Hints and Allegations.Joseph M. Paxton & Joshua D. Greene - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (3):511-527.
On the Wrong Track: Process and Content in Moral Psychology.Guy Kahane - 2012 - Mind and Language 27 (5):519-545.
Psychology and the Aims of Normative Ethics.Regina A. Rini - 2015 - In Jens Clausen & Neil Levy (eds.), Springer Handbook of Neuroethics.
What cognitive science tells us about ethics and the teaching of ethics.James Anderson - 1997 - Journal of Business Ethics 16 (3):279-291.
Theology and the Science of Moral Action: Virtue Ethics, Exemplarity, and Cognitive Neuroscience.James A. Van Slyke (ed.) - 2012 - Routledge.
Moral phenomenology: Foundational issues.Uriah Kriegel - 2008 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 7 (1):1-19.
Neuro-cognitive systems involved in morality.James Blair, A. A. Marsh, E. Finger, K. S. Blair & J. Luo - 2006 - Philosophical Explorations 9 (1):13 – 27.
Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics.Mark Johnson - 1993 - University of Chicago Press.
Analytics
Added to PP
2014-08-07
Downloads
329 (#36,007)
6 months
16 (#64,420)
2014-08-07
Downloads
329 (#36,007)
6 months
16 (#64,420)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
The Neuroscience of Moral Judgment: Empirical and Philosophical Developments.Joshua May, Clifford I. Workman, Julia Haas & Hyemin Han - 2022 - In Felipe De Brigard & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (eds.), Neuroscience and Philosophy. Cambridge, USA: MIT Press. pp. 17-47.
Evolutionary Debunking Arguments Meet Evolutionary Science.Arnon Levy & Yair Levy - 2020 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 100 (3):491-509.
References found in this work
Expertise in Moral Reasoning? Order Effects on Moral Judgment in Professional Philosophers and Non‐Philosophers.Eric Schwitzgebel & Fiery Cushman - 2012 - Mind and Language 27 (2):135-153.
An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function.Earl K. Miller & Jonathan D. Cohen - 2001 - Annual Review of Neuroscience 24 (1):167-202.
Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment.Joshua D. Greene, Sylvia A. Morelli, Kelly Lowenberg, Leigh E. Nystrom & Jonathan D. Cohen - 2008 - Cognition 107 (3):1144-1154.